Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!rochester!rit!ultb!awpsys
From: awpsys@ultb.UUCP (Andrew W. Potter)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec
Subject: Re: Looking for Benchmarks Between VAXstation 3100 and SUN 3/80
Message-ID: <1081@ultb.UUCP>
Date: 26 Jul 89 15:44:49 GMT
References: <1216@gvgpsa.GVG.TEK.COM> <9642@alice.UUCP> <18651@usc.edu> <511@granite.dec.com>
Reply-To: awpsys@ultb.isc.rit.edu.UUCP (Andrew W. Potter)
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Information Systems
Lines: 25

In article <511@granite.dec.com> rwood@granite.DEC.COM (Richard Wood) writes:
>
>The VAX 3100 machines (VAXstation 3100 and the new microVAX 3100 and
>VAXserver 3100) have the same clock speed as the VAXstation 3200, and
>thus should have generally identical performance.  

From what I understand this is true. However the 3200 (and MicroVAX 3600)
systems have the 64 Kbyte secondary memory cache.  The 3100 has to survive
with the on-chip cache.  By comparision the VAX 6200 (don't know about
the 6300 and 6400) have a 256 Kbyte secondary cache.

The larger cache sizes in the 3200 can make for better performance
in memory intensive applications.

I personally have noticed that the 3200 that I have with the Wren IV
disk (601 MB) and the DILOG SCSI controller performs quite a bit snappier
than a VAXstation 3100.

- Andy

-- 
Andrew W. Potter                 Bitnet:   awpsys@ritvax.BITNET
Systems Programmer               Internet: awpsys%ritvax.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
Information Systems and Computing
Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester NY, 14623 (716) 475-6994